Aginor

Java is a monster, you can create all kinds of silly stuff, including inner, anonymous classes (*shudder*). I stopped working with it years ago so I really can't say, sorry. @sobek: That's exactly what people tend to not fully understand. The problem isn't making the threads, the problems are that some stuff just can't be done parallel, inter-thread communication is a nightmare to debug and can cause stuff to actually run _slower_ than doing the same single-threaded, and pulling functionality out of the structure and implementing them in another thread is a ugly task. In many cases you would rather write it completely from scratch before doing that.

- More like 5% as far as I can tell from what I see. - ED is most likely not interested in fixing that. I don't see how we could have any influence on that. ED is a company, they work to create revenues. Fixing the A-10C (most people don't even know or care something is wrong with it, they only will get angry if the fix makes something else worse, see below) does not create revenues. - None that we would know of, these are parameters coded into the AFM, and touching them would mean that other things in the flight behaviour might get worse, which causes more fixes to be made and it takes weeks or months of developer time to get it working as intended. That's a lot of work for a module that has sold most of its copies.

Fully agree, thanks to Talisman for bringing this up! Railroads were of huge importance during WWII. And maybe we even get lucky and get them into our other maps in a more usable way as a side-effect. :) Also thanks to Raccoon for being here and talking to the community about the map! We appreciate that. :)

Multithreading in Java is rather easy, but it gives you a good idea about the added complexity for handling several threads. Just a small dip into that: http://www.tutorialspoint.com/java/java_multithreading.htm

Well, just to make sure we are on the same page here: Flying at corner speed won't win the fight for you. It is just one of several interesting numbers that can tell you about your possible performance (and that of your enemy). That being said: If you want to know the corner speed the best approach may be just googling your plane's name and the word "corner speed". It is likely that was discussed here and on other forums already. IIRC the MiG-29 with a few R-73 and fuel has a corner speed around 700km/h, which is slower than the F-15C's. The Su-27 probably has the lowest one, but I don't know it.

Ok, my try at explaining it simple: Corner speed is the minimum speed that still allows you to pull maximum G. So at corner speed you have your maximum turn rate. That's why it is so important. EDIT: So if you know the corner speed of your aircraft, you know you can pull max Gs and turn at your best rate, without buffeting. EDIT2: I think it is somewhere around 400 knots in the F-15C, but don't quote me on that. Depends on altitude also. EDIT3: Just remembered there was a rather cool publication that explains all that stuff quite understandable: http://navyflightmanuals.tpub.com/P-821/Corner-Speed-200.htm

This. Taiwan is the one with the F-5.

Another thing about the ATC I just remembered: To me one of the most awesome features concerning immersion would be if we could actually hear the other planes (players and AI) talking to the ATC. It adds tons of immersion. Right now we have a tiny bit of chatter in the air with flights reporting waypoints, but the really cool stuff would be the ATC comms. But it would also provide an important gameplay aspect (you know I am the "gameplay first!" guy), and that is situational awareness. If the ATC silently fails doing its job (like right now), you might not notice. But if you hear another plane getting permission for takeoff on runway 32 while you are on final for landing on runway 32 you know something is wrong and can react early.

I agree with NeilWillis this time. Sure sounds nice but nobody can tell what side effects it could have. I wouldn't get my hopes up for it being implemented any time soon.

This. So much this. Talking to real tanker crews reveals: DCSW tanker crews should get fired because they are making the whole thing much harder than it should be. So no, it is not only the player's fault. As for the radio thing Mower mentioned: Doesn't happen often to me, and if it does it is one voice command and you are back on track. No big problem IMHO. EDIT: Refuel training for the F/A-18C could be done in M2000C or Su-33 I guess. Although I seriously hope that ED will rework refueling in the not too far future. The hose and basket physics are pretty much non-existant which breaks immersion.

Funny idea. Not sure this is going to happen soon, but it does look like it could be really fun.

Kinda disagree. I have a G940 and it is great for helicopters. Beware though, you might have to fix one or two issues it has. I rewired the throttle for example.

F-104 (best) or F-105 would be very great. F-100 would still be nice. The rest is not interesting for me.

Thanks for the update, great job so far! I admit I had hoped for a cockpit screenshot, but maybe next time. :)

Ok, just from the top of my head and I could be totally wrong, but IIRC the Gazelle version we have, the 342 with the Viviane is from around 1990 and never carried older HOT missiles. That was the 341 Gazelle.

For planes it is quite a bit more complex, no doubt about it.

Oh come on, NeilWillis, don't be a naysayer. Some of the vehicles made by our late friend Lilkiki (we will really miss him. :( ) were top notch, better quality than some stuff created by ED that is in the sim right now. Same goes for upuaut, the awesome team Markindel/Stonehouse/crazyeddie, and at least half a dozen others in the community. Of course ED is constantly re-working assets, and of course I can see some licensing/IP issues, especially when doing modern stuff, but they can be overcome. For WWII stuff it is even better, for obvious reasons. ED should seriously consider this, especially for ground vehicles and ships there are great artists in the community who would share some of their stuff with ED, accepting a "thank you" and a mention in the credits in exchange for their work. Given the tools I would use my professional skills to do stuff for free. Unfortunately we don't have the tools I would need. Vehicle builders have at least some tools.

If you find a free model of the desired quality, with a license allowing it to be used, please go ahead and post it! There are some really talented people in this community that are able to import it to DCS, at least as an AI plane. "Flying" the VSN-AdA Mod planes yourself isn't that much fun IMO, I use it mainly for video making or something like that. The flight models are rather rough and of course there are no realistic cockpits. But as AI planes I like them very much. :)

Oh it does work, no doubt about that! It is just not done for carrier landing practice.

That confused me too. But I guess snowsniper just used the wrong word, he isn't a native English speaker I think.

Another thing that heavily affects this feeling of wrong distances (and also wrong speeds by the way) is the Field of View. Keep in mind that in real life you have a pretty wide FOV, around 180° without even really noticing it. with VR devices it is a bit like walking around with a bucket without a bottom strapped to your head. So yes, even though those VR devices might trick you into thinking you are naturally seeing something, there is a huge difference that some parts of your brain notice. EDIT: sniped.

HOLY COW! Now we're talking! While you are at it, would you consider to make a documentation/guide how that actually works with the cockpit instruments and so on? I don't know if such a thing exists already in some comprehensive form. If it doesn't this would be the perfect opportunity. I am sure there are some guys new to DCSW modding who would be very grateful for that.

From the top of my head: - "Dog" - "Gypsy" - "Dakota" - "Nickel" EDIT: - "Hunter" - "Diamond" ....I'm sure I'll remember some more soon. EDIT: Found a page that has them. Click on a squadron and the callsign is right on top on most pages: http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-squadron.htm

Remember that Philippines Bo-105 picture I posted? This one: http://s146.photobucket.com/user/brotchador/media/mbb195philippineairforce_zps021070cb.jpg.html I found out what rockets those were! Those were Oerlikon-Buhrle SURA-FL 80mm sliding fin aircraft rockets. Interesting design. They are stacked on each other! http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?96623-Oerlikon-aircraft-rockets As far as I can tell right now they used a very simple fixed sight for those. They are mounted on this mount, which is similar to the Indonesian one I think: http://aviadejavu.ru/Images6/AN/AN79-7/26-2.jpg Oh, and this one is also nice, a spanish one: http://www.mbb-bo105.de/pics/bo105_et162_2.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/319/19625828312_5141949617_b.jpg Man, I love that heli with all those cool versions!

That's a different system. Hornets do not make arrested landings (like on a carrier) on land.